British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13555
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Between the woods and the water

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Cyril Haearn » 14 Jul 2019, 4:04pm

Mike Sales wrote:
mercalia wrote:strange thing to say like I didnt join the army to kill people


I cannot resist it any longer. Was it for the water skiing and the travel?

Colonel:
Watkins, why did you join the army?
Watkins:
For the water-skiing and the travel, sir. Not for the killing, sir. I asked them to put it on my form, sir: "no killing".
Colonel:
Watkins, are you a pacifist?
Watkins:
No, sir. I'm not a pacifist, sir: I'm a coward.
Colonel:
[disgusted] That's a very silly line. Sit down!

Many would be cowards, had they courage enough
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 3405
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Cugel » 14 Jul 2019, 4:30pm

Mick F wrote:(snip)

If we'd wanted to carry a rifle and kill people, we'd have joined the Army.


But you joined the navy, which is also an organisation that periodically kills people, often in large numbers as you describe in the Falklands event.

And now, you want out of the EU but don't want to cause others a load of economic hardships and other ills. You vote for the Brexit Party but don't want to bring about any kind of fascism in Blighty.

Do you see the parallel? The choices you make have consequences, for yourself and others. They are not just about you and what you want or what you think your choice can be confined to.

Cugel

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10736
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Cunobelin » 14 Jul 2019, 7:12pm

The fact is that most join for qualifications and a career, wanting to kill people is not on anyone's list of desirable conditions of employment

It should also be noted that many of the Army (especially infantry) are. from deprived areas where there is massive unemployment, few opportunitoies for advancement, education or a reasonable wage. The Armed forces offer a way out.

Mike Sales
Posts: 5073
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Mike Sales » 14 Jul 2019, 7:21pm

Cunobelin wrote:The fact is that most join for qualifications and a career, wanting to kill people is not on anyone's list of desirable conditions of employment

It should also be noted that many of the Army (especially infantry) are. from deprived areas where there is massive unemployment, few opportunitoies for advancement, education or a reasonable wage. The Armed forces offer a way out.


Unfortunately having to possibly take a part in killing is a part of the bargain when one takes the Queen's shilling. As Mick found out.
Watkins tried to avoid this part of the contract, but this would not wash with the colonel. One cannot expect to remain a pacifist when one joins the armed forces.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10736
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Cunobelin » 15 Jul 2019, 5:28pm

Mike Sales wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:The fact is that most join for qualifications and a career, wanting to kill people is not on anyone's list of desirable conditions of employment

It should also be noted that many of the Army (especially infantry) are. from deprived areas where there is massive unemployment, few opportunitoies for advancement, education or a reasonable wage. The Armed forces offer a way out.


Unfortunately having to possibly take a part in killing is a part of the bargain when one takes the Queen's shilling. As Mick found out.
Watkins tried to avoid this part of the contract, but this would not wash with the colonel. One cannot expect to remain a pacifist when one joins the armed forces.



Why not, pacifists have served in the armed services and served with distinction

In WW1. the most highly decorated soldier was William Coltman

He was a pacifist who never broke his personal ethics, never fired a bullet, yet was awarded

Victoria Cross
Distinguished Conduct Medal ( DCM ) & Bar
Military Medal ( MM ) & Bar
1914 - 15 Star
British War Medal ( 1914-20 )
Victory Medal ( 1914-19 ) + MiD Oakleaf
Defence Medal ( 1939-45 )
King George VI Coronation Medal ( 1937 )
Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Medal ( 1953 )
Special Constabulary Long Service Medal
Croix de Guerre ( France )

Mike Sales
Posts: 5073
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Mike Sales » 15 Jul 2019, 6:14pm

Cunobelin wrote:
Mike Sales wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:The fact is that most join for qualifications and a career, wanting to kill people is not on anyone's list of desirable conditions of employment

It should also be noted that many of the Army (especially infantry) are. from deprived areas where there is massive unemployment, few opportunitoies for advancement, education or a reasonable wage. The Armed forces offer a way out.


Unfortunately having to possibly take a part in killing is a part of the bargain when one takes the Queen's shilling. As Mick found out.
Watkins tried to avoid this part of the contract, but this would not wash with the colonel. One cannot expect to remain a pacifist when one joins the armed forces.



Why not, pacifists have served in the armed services and served with distinction

In WW1. the most highly decorated soldier was William Coltman

He was a pacifist who never broke his personal ethics, never fired a bullet, yet was awarded

Victoria Cross
Distinguished Conduct Medal ( DCM ) & Bar
Military Medal ( MM ) & Bar
1914 - 15 Star
British War Medal ( 1914-20 )
Victory Medal ( 1914-19 ) + MiD Oakleaf
Defence Medal ( 1939-45 )
King George VI Coronation Medal ( 1937 )
Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Medal ( 1953 )
Special Constabulary Long Service Medal
Croix de Guerre ( France )


I know nothing of his doings, but if they did not involve killing he must have had duties which explicitly did not allow using a weapon. This is hardly a stipulation which could be allowed to many soldiers, or an army could not function.
By definition an army is intended to use lethal force. All its functions are pointed towards this end.
Perhaps he was a medical soldier. Many pacifists would see a post so closely bound to helping soldiers to function as being wrong. Soldiers who do not fire a gun are nevertheless part of a killing machine.
A functioning army could not afford to carry very many non fighters. Even the scarlet majors back at base are guilty of the killing they order, when they speed glum heroes up the line to death.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6747
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Tangled Metal » 15 Jul 2019, 11:01pm

There was a piece of military research carried out early in wwi or possibly boer war (I can't remember the exact details). They found that something like 90% of the killing was carried out by 10% of the armed, front line soldiers. Something about them targeting and firing the rifles but not hitting their target.

The outcome was a complete rethink on military training they concentrated on training in aggression so the soldiers could have the mentality of someone who could actually kill someone. The techniques learnt back then still forms the basics of military training in the British army.

I believe it has something to do with degree of psychopathy in general population and how it's increased in trained soldiers.

There's a lot to military science I reckon.

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13555
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Between the woods and the water

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Cyril Haearn » 16 Jul 2019, 2:38am

A lot that it is better not to know about
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 49220
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Mick F » 16 Jul 2019, 7:36am

No aggression training in the RN ........... or should I say that in all my 27years of service, there was none at all.
They taught independent thinking, resourcefulness and teamwork, and we fostered that in our junior ratings. No doubt officer training was the same.
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10173
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby horizon » 16 Jul 2019, 10:05am

I just wanted to clarify that my purpose in starting this thread was to highlight the fact that we are putting people's lives at risk (those of service people and others) in order to meet the very minor needs of a greedy, self-centred, unbelievably stupid, minority class of people called motorists (and by that I don't mean everyone who drives a car).

As a nation, we have made ourselves dependent on the goodwill of Iran and then go about damaging that goodwill in very conceivable way. And then pretend that "Britain's interests are threatened".

The utter stupidity of the current US and UK governments in no way reflects on the courage and skill of the armed forces.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6747
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Tangled Metal » 16 Jul 2019, 10:12am

Interesting how you think oil is about serving motorist's interests only. This thread doesn't sound like it was about events around the straits of Hormuz but a thread to complain about motorists. Am I right?

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10173
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby horizon » 16 Jul 2019, 10:43am

Tangled Metal wrote:Interesting how you think oil is about serving motorist's interests only. This thread doesn't sound like it was about events around the straits of Hormuz but a thread to complain about motorists. Am I right?


Totally. By creating a country that is dependent on other people's oil we have put ourselves in a difficult and dangerous situation. This situation has been created by motorists demanding cheap fuel to use unnecessarily large vehicles for unnecessary journeys by car in a completely unrestrained way (see current road building programme, the school run, poor cycling provision, out of town shopping and lack of fuel escalator). I'm not talking about ambulances or industry.

To go to war to protect the right to abuse the environment, to create pollution, to damage health and to mar our cities and landscapes is IMV obscene.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

merseymouth
Posts: 1783
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby merseymouth » 16 Jul 2019, 10:53am

Hi all, Noel Chevasse was a double VC, never fired a shot! Kings Liverpool Doctor. Both VC's earned in the same year, second postumously.
His courage under fire could never be questioned, both awards were for his actions in rescuing men from no man's land.
His is the only war grave with the two VC's shown. TTFN MM

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6747
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby Tangled Metal » 16 Jul 2019, 12:45pm

So oil only goes to motorists as in car drivers?

What about our obsession with moving stuff around by truck, diesel train, plane and boat? Do you know how much petroleum energy sources go to none car driving uses? Quite possibly these other uses are the excuses warmongers use to go to war.

Then plastics? Where does the materials needed to make our plastics come from?

You seem to select your environmental concerns according to your prejudices. How much oil based products do you have in your house? How much if what you own and buy depends on oil to be produced or delivered?

No doubt you buy organic and local too, never fly, never catch a bus / train / plane and most certainly get all your clothes made from flax grown organically and locally.

Seriously though, we're in a world that's ruined for every year we're on this planet. Yet it's the car's fault!

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10173
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: British warships in Gulf to be renamed AA and RAC

Postby horizon » 16 Jul 2019, 12:59pm

Tangled Metal wrote:So oil only goes to motorists as in car drivers?



This might be a useful resource:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ersion.pdf (page 73).

Yes, I'm aiming this at motoring. This is because of what I see about me as a cyclist. I feel that motorists are pandered to by governments and the effect of this is pretty horrendous (as I'm sure I don't need to demonstrate). So yes, first up is motoring. Flying, plastics, industry etc all have to be more careful with their oil usage but motorists doing short journeys in a larger than necessary vehicle are a pretty good starting point IMV.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher